Title
Lara's Gift and Decors, Inc. vs. PNB General Insurers Co., Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 230429-30
Decision Date
Jan 24, 2018
LGDI's fire insurance claim denied by PNB Gen and UCPB; RTC allowed additional evidence, CA reversed, SC reinstated RTC, citing procedural discretion and relevance.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-17870)

Factual Background

LGDI insured its raw materials, inventory, equipment and leased warehouses under an open fire policy. After a February 19, 2008 blaze destroyed several buildings, LGDI claimed indemnity. Respondents’ independent adjusters deemed LGDI’s supporting documents insufficient, leading to claim denial for alleged policy violations (Conditions 13, 19), misdeclaration of machinery, and lack of independent evidence.

Trial Court Proceedings

LGDI filed a Complaint for Specific Performance and Damages in Makati RTC Branch 147. At pre-trial, both parties identified and pre-marked voluminous exhibits and reserved the right to introduce additional documents during trial. Trial commenced on November 7, 2013, with witnesses including Gina Servita and Luis Raymond Villafuerte. Servita reconstituted commercial documents months after the fire; Villafuerte admitted reduced involvement in LGDI and limited knowledge of the Questioned Documents.

Respondents’ Motions and RTC Orders

On July 10, 2014, LGDI submitted Mrs. Villafuerte’s 2nd Supplemental Judicial Affidavit. PNB Gen moved to expunge it (citing the Judicial Affidavit Rule and Pre-Trial Guidelines); UCPB adopted the motion. On September 18, 2014, the RTC overruled objections and allowed LGDI to examine Villafuerte on the Questioned Documents, without prejudice to the expunge motions. On October 1 and November 26, 2014, the RTC denied both motions, relying on the parties’ pre-trial reservations and the court’s discretionary power to admit evidence.

Court of Appeals Decisions

December 21, 2015 – The CA dismissed respondents’ certiorari petitions and affirmed the RTC orders, holding that (a) Section 7, Rule 132 authorized re-direct examination on matters raised in cross-examination and (b) the Pre-Trial Order reservations warranted admission of additional documents and the supplemental affidavit.
March 6, 2017 – On respondents’ motions for reconsideration, a Special Former Fifth Division reversed itself, ruling that the Judicial Affidavit Rule (Sections 2 and 10) and Pre-Trial Guidelines precluded belated submission and that Villafuerte lacked personal knowledge to authenticate the documents.

Issue

Whether the CA erred in disallowing the introduction of additional documentary exhibits during trial and in annulling the RTC’s admission of the 2nd Supplemental Judicial Affidavit of Mrs. Villafuerte.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court granted LGDI’s Rule 45 petition, reinstating the CA’s December 21, 2015 Decision. It held that:
• The Judicial Affidavit Rule and Pre-Trial Guidelines do not absolutely bar additional evidence once trial has begun. Section 2 of the JA Rule mandates timely submission but allows one belated submission for valid reasons without undue prejudice (Sec. 10).
• The Guidelines on Pre-Trial permit the trial court, in its discreti


...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.